Hindustan College of Pharmacy v. State of Kerala and Others (W.P.(C) No. 18448/2020 leading; connected matters W.P.(C) Nos. 24914/2020, 13760/2020, 24922/2020)

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN** **WEDNESDAY, THE 09TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2020 / 18TH AGRAHAYANA, 1942** ## **W.P.(C)No.18448 OF 2020(E)** ## **PETITIONER:** **HINDUSTAN COLLEGE OF PHARMACY, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, CHENAPADI P.O., KANJIRAPALLY, KOTTAYAM-686509.** **BY ADVS. SRI.S.KRISHNAMOORTHY SMT.NITHYA SUGUNAN** ## **RESPONDENTS:** **1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 2 KERALA UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES (KUHAS), REPRESENTED BY REGISTRAR, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., THRISSUR-680596. 3 PHARMACY COUNCIL OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, NBCC CENTRE, III FLOOR, PLOT NO.2, COMMUNITY CENTRE, MAA ANANDAMAYI MARG, OKLA PHASE I, NEW DELHI110020.** **R2 BY SHRI.P.SREEKUMAR, SC, KERALA UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES R3 BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR SRI SUNIL NATH N.B- GOVERNMENT PLEADER** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09.12.2020, ALONG WITH WP(C).24914/2020(L), WP(C).13760/2020 & WP(C).24922/2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 2 **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN** **WEDNESDAY, THE 09TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2020 / 18TH AGRAHAYANA, 1942** ## **W.P.(C)No.24914 OF 2020(L)** **PETITIONER: HINDUSTAN COLLEGE OF PHARMACY REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN, CHENAPADI P.O. KANJIRAPALLY, KOTTAYAM 686 509. BY ADVS. SRI.S.KRISHNAMOORTHY SMT.NITHYA SUGUNAN RESPONDENTS: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001. 2 KERALA UNVIERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES (KUHAS), REPRESENTED BY REGISTRAR, MEDICAL COLLEGE, P.O. THRISSUR 680 596. 3 PHARMACY COUNCIL OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY TIS SECRETARY, NBCC CENTRE, IIIL FLOOR, PLOT NO. 2 COMMUNITY CENTRE, MAA ANANDAMYI MARG, OKLA PHASE I NEW DELHI 110 020. R2 BY SHRI.P.SREEKUMAR, SC, KERALA UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES R3 BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR SRI SUNIL NATH N.B- GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09.12.2020, ALONG WITH WP(C).18448/2020(E), WP(C).13760/2020 & WP(C).24922/2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 3 ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN** **WEDNESDAY, THE 09TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2020 / 18TH AGRAHAYANA, 1942** ## **W.P.(C)No.13760 OF 2020(T)** ## **PETITIONER:** **NIRMALA EDUCATIONAL TRUST REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN, KUNNAPILLY P.O., MELOOR, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680311.** **BY ADVS. SRI.S.KRISHNAMOORTHY SMT.NITHYA SUGUNAN** ## **RESPONDENTS:** - **1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.** - **2 KERALA UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES (KUHAS), REP. BY REGISTRAR, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., THRISSUR, PIN-680596.** - **3 PHARMACY COUNCIL OF INDIA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, NBCC CENTRE, III FLOOR, PLOT NO.2, COMMUNITY CENTRE, MAA ANANDAMAYI MARG, OKLA PHASE I, NEW DELHI-110020.** **R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.SREEKUMAR R3 BY ADV. MR.P.VIJAYAKUMAR, SCGC SRI SUNIL NATH N.B- GOVERNMENT PLEADER** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09.12.2020, ALONG WITH WP(C).18448/2020(L), WP(C).24914/2020 & WP(C).24922/2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 4 ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN** **WEDNESDAY, THE 09TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2020 / 18TH AGRAHAYANA, 1942** ## **W.P.(C)No.24922 OF 2020(M)** ## **PETITIONER:** **NIRMALA EDUCATIONAL TRUST REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, KUNNAPILLY P.O. MELOOR, THRISSUR DISTRICT 680 311. BY ADVS. SRI.S.KRISHNAMOORTHY SMT.NITHYA SUGUNAN** ## **RESPONDENTS:** **1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AN FAMILY WELFARE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001. 2 KERALA UNVIERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES, (KUHAS), REPRESENTED BY REGISTRAR, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O. THRISSUR 680 596. 3 PHARMACY COUNCIL OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, NBCC CENTRE, III FLOOR, PLOT NO. 2, COMMUNITY CENTRE MAA ANANDAMAYI MARG, OKLA PHASE I NEW DELHI 110 020. R2 BY SHRI.P.SREEKUMAR, SC, KERALA UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES R3 BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR SRI SUNIL NATH N.B- GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09.12.2020, ALONG WITH WP(C).13760/2020(T), WP(C).18448/2020 & WP(C).24914/2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 5 ## **JUDGMENT** Since common issues are raised, these writ petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment, treating W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020 as the leading case. 2. W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020:- The petitioner college, namely, Hindustan College of Pharmacy, is conducting B.Pharm course with an intake of 60 seats, from the academic year 201819, with the approval of the All India Council for Technical Education (for brevity, 'AICTE') and the affiliation granted by the 2[nd] respondent Kerala University of Health Sciences. The 3[rd] respondent Pharmacy Council of India (for brevity, 'PCI') has also granted approval to the petitioner college for conducting B.Pharm course. The petitioner college is also conducting D.Pharm course with an intake of 60 seats, with the approval of AICTE and PCI and also the affiliation granted by the Directorate of Medical Education, Kerala. By Ext.P1 order dated 25.04.2019, the AICTE granted approval for conducting B.Pharm course with an intake of 100 seats and D.Pharm course with an intake of 60 seats, for the 6 W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 academic year 2019-20. By Ext.P2 order dated 10.06.2019, the 3[rd] respondent PCI granted approval for conducting B.Pharm course with an intake of 100 seats (as against the intake of 60 seats granted for the academic year 2018-19) and D.Pharm course with an intake of 60 seats, for the academic year 2019- 20. However, the 2[nd] respondent University granted affiliation for B.Pharm course, for the academic year 2019-20, with an intake of only 60 seats. By Ext.P7 communication dated 14.08.2019, the 2[nd] respondent University rejected the request made by the petitioner college for increase of seats for B.Pharm course from 60 to 100, for the academic year 2019-20, for the reason that as per Para.6(2) of Ext.P9 academic norms dated 17.05.2013 for granting provisional affiliation to colleges and courses and for continuation of provisional affiliation, for increase of seats, at least the first batch has passed out of the applicant college and the college is approved as a professional teaching institution by Government of India, through Gazette notification. Since the petitioner college was granted provisional affiliation for starting 7 W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 B.Pharm course only in the academic year 2018-19, it is not eligible for increase of seats. As per Para.6(3) of Ext.P9 academic norms, for increase of seats, the final year result of the previous batch in applicant college is 60% or above; or above the University average. 2.1. In **Pharmacy Council of India v. Dr.S.K. Toshniwal Educational Trusts Vidarbha Institute of Pharmacy [2020 SCC OnLine SC 296]** the Apex Court held that the Pharmacy Act, 1948, which is a Special Act in the field of pharmacy, shall prevail and consequently so far as the recognition of degrees and diplomas of pharmacy education is concerned, the Pharmacy Act shall prevail over the All India Council for Technical Education Act, 1987. Consequently, the norms and regulations set by the Pharmacy Council of India and other specified authorities under the Pharmacy Act would have to be followed by an institution imparting education for degrees and diplomas in pharmacy, including the norms and regulations with respect to increase and/or decrease in intake capacity of the students. 2.2. After the decision of the Apex Court in **Dr.S.K.** 8 W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 ## **Toshniwal Educational Trusts Vidarbha Institute of** **Pharmacy** , the 3[rd] respondent PCI, by Ext.P5 order dated 10.04.2020, granted extension of approval for B.Pharm course with an intake of 100 seats and for D.Pharm course with an intake of 60 seats, for the academic year 2020-21. Based on Ext.P5 order, the petitioner college submitted Ext.P6 request dated 03.07.2020 before the 2[nd] respondent University seeking affiliation for enhancing the intake for B.Pharm course from 60 to 100, form the academic year 2020-21. 2.3. On 07.09.2020, the petitioner has filed this writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P7 communication dated 14.08.2019 issued by the 2[nd] respondent University, declaring that the petitioner college is eligible to enhance seats for B.Pharm course, as approved by the 3[rd] respondent PCI in Ext.P5. The petitioner has also sought for a writ of certiorari to quash clause (2) and (3) of Para.6 of Ext.P9 academic norms to the extent it restrict enhancement of seats for B.Pharm in the petitioner college; a writ of mandamus commanding the 2[nd] respondent to 9 W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 enhance the seats for B.Pharm course in the petitioner college from 60 to 100, as approved by the AICTE as well as the PCI as per Exts.P1, P2 and P5 respectively, for the current academic year 2020-21 itself; and a writ of mandamus commanding the 2[nd] respondent University to process Ext.P6 application, in the light of Ext.P5 approval granted by the 3[rd] respondent PCI, without imposing any conditions in Ext.P9 academic norms for enhancing the seats for B.Pharm course in the petitioner college from 60 to 100 2.4. On 09.09.2020, when this writ petition came up for admission, the learned Government Pleader for the 1[st] respondent State and also the learned Standing Counsel for the 2[nd] respondent University sought time to get instructions. 2.5. On 13.10.2020, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the inspection by the inspecting team of the 2[nd] respondent University, in connection with the application for enhancement of seats in the petitioner college for B.Pharm Course is going on. On 02.11.2020, the petitioner filed I.A.No.1 of 2020, seeking an order directing the 2[nd] respondent University 10 W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 to intimate the status of affiliation for enhancement of seats from 60 to 100, for B.Pharm course in the petitioner college, for the academic year 2020-21, to the Commissioner for Entrance Examinations, before the allotment process is completed, provisionally, subject to the result of the writ petition. 2.6. On 11.11.2020, the petitioner has filed I.A.No.2 of 2020, seeking an order directing the 2[nd] respondent University to consider the report dated 13.10.2020 of the inspection commission for granting provisional affiliation for 100 seats in B.Pharm course, ignoring the conditions in Exts.P7 and P9 to the extent it is challenged in this writ petition, pending final disposal of the writ petition. Along with I.A.No.3 of 2020 the petitioner has placed on record Ext.P11 order dated 13.08.2020 and Ext.P12 communication dated 09.11.2020 of the 2[nd] respondent University. In Ext.P12 communication dated 09.11.2020 it is stated that the following deficiencies were found in the application made by the petitioner college for enhancement of seats for B.Pharm course from 60 to 100, for the academic year 2020-21; 11 W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 1. Since the college was started during the year 2018-19, the first batch of students have not completed their final year and as per the norms enhancement of seats can be permitted only if the first batch is passed out. 2. The average pass percentage of previous regular examinations of all existing batches of B.Pharm course in the college is only 24.48 while the required pass percentage is 50 or above, as per University norms. In the above circumstances, the 2[nd] respondent rejected the application made by the petitioner college for enhancement of seats in B.Pharm course from 60 to 100, for the academic year 2020-21. 3. W.P.(C)No.24914 of 2020:- During the pendency of W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, the petitioner filed this writ petition, in order to challenge Ext.P6 communication dated 09.11.2020 issued by the 2[nd] respondent University (Ext.12 in W.P. (C)No.18448 of 2020), whereby the University rejected the application made by the petitioner college for enhancement of seats in B.Pharm course from 60 to 100, for the academic year 2020-21. In this writ petition, the petitioner has sought for a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P6 letter dated 09.11.2020 of the 2[nd] 12 W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 respondent University and declare that the petitioner college is eligible to enhance the seats for B.Pharm course, as approved in Ext.P3 approval order dated 10.04.2020 (Ext.P5 in W.P. (C)No.18448 of 2020) issued by the 3[rd] respondent PCI; a writ of certiorari to quash Clause 2(5)(v) of the Affiliation Statute (Amendment to Chapter-XXI of the First Statutes) of the 2[nd] respondent University, mentioned in Ext.P6 letter dated 09.11.2020, to the extent of fixing conditions to restrict enhancement of seats for B.Pharm course; and a writ of mandamus commanding the 2[nd] respondent University to enhance the seats for B.Pharm course in the petitioner college from 60 to 100, as approved by the 3[rd] respondent PCI as per Ext.P3 order dated 10.04.2020, for the current academic year 2020-21 itself. 3.1. On 16.11.2020, when this writ petition came up for admission, the learned Standing Counsel for the 2[nd] respondent University and also the learned ASGI for the 3[rd] respondent PCI sought time to get instructions. 3.2. A statement has been filed by the 2[nd] respondent W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 13 University, opposing the reliefs sought for in this writ petition. In the statement, it is stated that B.Pharm course in the petitioner college was commenced only in the year 2018. The first batch of the students of the college has not passed out. As per the norms fixed by the University, in order to consider the application for enhancement of seats, the first batch of the students in the course, in which enhancement is sought for, should have completed the course. In addition to that the average pass percentage in the previous years should be 50 or above. In the case of the petitioner college, both the eligibility conditions remain unfulfilled. Therefore, the application made by the petitioner college for enhancement of seats for B.Pharm course was rejected by Ext.P6 communication. The University insists for a minimum pass percentage in the case of previous batches, in order to ensure that the institution is properly functioning. The University is expected to monitor the performance of the institution and the best way to assess the performance is to reckon the average pass percentage in the institution. In the case W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 14 of an institution, which lacks the minimum pass percentage of 50 in a professional course, it is not advisable to grant enhancement in the intake. The contention of the petitioner college that the availability of infrastructure should be the criteria to grant enhancement of seats is the view point of the management, which is interested in making more admissions. But as the examining and affiliating body, the University has to assess the past performance of the college before permitting the enhanced intake. Therefore, the challenge made in this writ petition on the statutory provision is without any basis. Recognition and affiliation are distinct and different. As held by this Court in various decisions, the Universities are not expected to grant affiliation in a routine manner and the University is competent to derive its own standards and procedures to decide on the grant of affiliation. Affiliation is not a fundamental right, and it is a statutory right governed by the norms fixed by the University. 4. W.P.(C)No.13760 of 2020:- The petitioner Trust is the educational agency of Nirmala College of Health Sciences, which is conducting B.Pharm course and D.Pharm course, from the 15 W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 academic year 2015-16, with the approval of the AICTE (till 2019-20) and the 3[rd] respondent PCI and also the affiliation granted by the 2[nd] respondent University (for B.Pharm course)/Directorate of Medical Education, Kerala for D.Pham course). For B.Pharm course, the intake originally approved by the AICTE was 60, which was enhanced to 100, for the academic year 2018-19 by Ext.P3 order dated 04.04.2018 of the AICTE. The petitioner submitted Ext.P5 application dated 25.01.2018 seeking enhancement of intake for B.Pharm course from 60 to 120 seats. The intake for B.Pham course approved by the 3[rd] respondent PCI was only 60 seats, till the same was enhanced to 100 seats for the academic year 2020-21 by Ext.P8 order dated 04/05.06.2020. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted Ext.P9 request dated 24.06.2020 before the 2[nd] respondent University seeking affiliation for enhancing the intake for B.Pharm course from 60 to 100 seats for the academic year 2020-21. The document marked as Ext.P12 is the academic norms dated 17.05.2013 for granting provisional affiliation to colleges and 16 W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 courses and for continuation of provisional affiliation, issued by the 2[nd] respondent University. As per Para.6(2) of Ext.P12, for granting provisional affiliation to colleges and courses and for continuation of provisional affiliation, for increase of seats, at least the first batch has passed out of the applicant college and the college is approved as a professional teaching institution by Government of India, through Gazette notification. As per Para.6(3), for increase of seats, the final year result of the previous batch in applicant college is 60% or above; or above the University average. The petitioner has filed this writ petition, seeking a writ of certiorari to quash clauses (2) and (3) of Para.6 of Ext.P12 academic norms dated 17.05.2013 to the extent it restrict enhancement of seats for B.Pharm course in the petitioner's college; a writ of mandamus commanding the 2[nd] respondent University to enhance the seats for B.Pharm course in the petitioner's college from 60 to 100, as approved by AICTE as well as PCI, as per Exts.P2 and P8 respectively, for the current academic year 2020-21 itself; and a writ of mandamus 17 W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 commanding the 2[nd] respondent University to process Exts.P5 and P9 applications in the light of Ext.P8 approval granted by the 3[rd] respondent PCI, without imposing the conditions in Ext.P12 academic norms for enhancement of seats for B.Pharm course from 60 to 100, in the petitioner's institution. 4.1. On 09.07.2020, when this writ petition came up for admission, the learned Standing Counsel for the 2[nd] respondent University sought time to get instructions. On 26.08.2020, this Court passed an interim order directing the 2[nd] respondent University to open the web portal to enable the petitioner to apply for the enhanced seats, which shall remain open for at least one week. 5. W.P.(C)No.24922 of 2020:- During the pendency of W.P.(C)No.13760 of 2020, the 2[nd] respondent University issued with Ext.P5 communication dated 11.11.2020, whereby the application made by the petitioner for provisional affiliation for enhancement of seats in B.Pharm course from 60 to 100, for the academic year 2020-21, stands rejected. In Ext.P5 communication dated 11.11.2020 it is stated that the following W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 18 deficiency was found in the application made by the petitioner college for enhancement of seats for B.Pharm course from 60 to 100, for the academic year 2020-21; The average pass percentage of previous regular examinations of all existing batches of B.Pharm course in the college is only 43.65 while the required pass percentage is 50 or above, as per University norms. In the above circumstances, the 2[nd] respondent rejected the application made by the petitioner college for enhancement of seats in B.Pharm course from 60 to 100, for the academic year 2020-21. In the writ petition, the petitioner has sought for a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P5 communication dated 11.11.2020 issued by the 2[nd] respondent University and grant affiliation for enhancement of seats from 60 to 100, for B.Pharm course in the petitioner's college; a writ of certiorari to quash clause 2(5)(v) of the Affiliation Statute (Amendment to Chapter-XXI of the First Statutes) of the 2[nd] respondent University mentioned in Ext.P5 communication dated 11.11.2020, prescribing conditions to the extent of 50% pass percentage for the previous regular examinations for enhancing the seats in the college; and a writ of 19 W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 mandamus commanding the 2[nd] respondent University to grant affiliation for enhancing the seats from 60 to 100 for B.Pharm course in the petitioner's college, in the current academic year itself. 5.1. The 2[nd] respondent University has filed a statement in this writ petition, raising contentions similar to that raised in the statement filed in W.P.(C)No.24914 of 2020. 6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner in the respective writ petitions, the learned Government Pleader for the 1[st] respondent State, the learned Standing Counsel for the 2[nd] respondent University and also the learned Assistant Solicitor General of India for the 3[rd] respondent PCI. 7. The common issue that arises for consideration in these writ petitions is as to whether the Pharmacy College in the respective writ petitions are entitled to affiliation by the 2[nd] respondent University, for enhancement of intake for B.Pharm course, from 60 to 100 for the academic year 2020-21, on the strength of the approval granted by the 3[rd] respondent PCI for an intake of 100 seats. W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 20 8. Chapter XXI of the Kerala University of Heath Sciences First Statutes, 2013 deals with affiliation of colleges. Statute 2 of Chapter XXI deals with date of application and Statute 3 deals with form of application. Statute 10 of Chapter XXI deals with grant of affiliation. As per Statute 10(1), the University may appoint a commission to inspect the proposed site of a new college/or to make a physical verification of the facilities that may exist for starting the new college/course, if the application is considered favorably by the University. The commission will inspect the suitability of the proposed site, verify the title deeds as regards proprietary right of the Management over the land (and buildings, if any) offered, building accommodation provided, if any, assets of the Management, constitution of the registered body, capability of maintaining academic standards and all other relevant matters. Further action on the application shall be taken on the receipt of the report of the commission. As per Statute 10(2), the grant of affiliation shall depend upon the fulfillment by the Management of all the conditions that are specified here or 21 W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 that may be specified later for the satisfactory establishment and maintenance of the proposed institution/courses of studies and on the reports of inspection by the commission or commissions which the University may appoint for the purpose. As per Statute 10(3), unless all the conditions are fulfilled, before the commencement of the academic year, no new college/or additional courses/or enhancement of seats shall be permitted to be started during that year. 9. Section 23 of the Kerala University of Heath Sciences Act, 2010 deals with powers of the Governing Council. As per clause (v) of Section 23, the Governing Council shall, subject to the provisions of the Act, exercise the powers to affiliate medical institutions in accordance with the terms and conditions of such affiliation provided by the Act and Statutes. Section 25 of the Act deals with powers of Academic Council. As per clause (xviii) of Section 25, the powers and duties of the Academic Council shall be to prescribe norms for granting affiliation, continuation of recognition, extension of recognition to institutions of higher W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 22 learning and research for specialised studies; and as per clause (xix) to grant affiliation to colleges or institutions in accordance with the provisions of the Statutes, Ordinances and Regulations. 10. In **Secretary, Perpetual Succour Charitable Trust, Maradu v. Kerala University of Health Sciences [2016 (3)** **KLT 608]** this Court noticed that, Section 23 of the Kerala University of Heath Sciences Act, 2010 deals with the powers of the Governing Council and clause (v) of Section 23 speaks of affiliation of medical institutions in accordance with the terms and conditions of affiliation provided by the Act and Statutes. Section 25 of the Act deals with powers and duties of the Academic Council, giving it the authority to provide norms, _inter alia_ , for granting affiliation and also to grant such affiliation to individual colleges or institutions in accordance with the provisions of the Statutes, Ordinances and Regulations. Statute 10 of the Kerala University of Heath Sciences First Statutes, 2013 provides the procedure for grant of affiliation. Statute 10(2) specifically speaks of fulfillment by the management of all conditions that are specified here or that may be specified later for the satisfactory 23 W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 establishment and maintenance of the proposed institution/ course of studies and on the reports of inspection by the commission or commissions, which the University may appoint for the purpose. If it was the intention of the Statute maker that a condition of affiliation could be made only by an amendment to the Statutes, then there was no need to use the words 'that may ' be specified later . Any amendment made would definitely form a part of the Statute and acquire the character of a statutory mandate, even without the said words, since, already whatever specified in the Statute has to be fulfilled by the Management for grant of affiliation; by the first limb of the provision in the First Statutes. No words used in a Statute could be rendered redundant and it is with a specific purpose that a Statute is framed in a particular manner and employing such words as the Statute maker uses; which indicates the intention. What is 'specified later'; indicates any specification, for the satisfactory establishment and maintenance of the proposed institution/ courses of studies and it can be based on the reports by a 24 W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 commission or commissions, which the University may appoint for the purpose. This takes in an individual inspection of a college or the appointment of a commission to deal with academic matters and prescribe standards; as held above, for better and quality education. Therefore, this Court did not countenance the argument of the learned Senior Counsel that only a statutory amendment would clothe the University with the power to make such a prescription. 11. In **Perpetual Succour Charitable Trust** , the petitioner has approached this Court, feeling aggrieved with the insistence of the Kerala University of Heath Sciences, requiring a 300 bedded hospital for sanctioning a nursing college. Ext.P3 is the guidelines of minimum requirements for establishing a nursing college for conducting a graduate course, issued by the Indian Nursing Council, which requires only a 100 bedded own hospital as an eligibility condition to establish the graduate course. However Ext.P4 decision of the University prescribes a 300 bedded hospital as a preliminary requirement which goes against Ext.P3 prescription by the Apex Council. The petitioner 25 W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 contended that, without such prescription in the Act, Statute, Ordinances or Regulations, the Governing Council cannot prescribe such a condition. The University would be free to amend its Statutes and Ordinances, but till such time an amendment is brought in, making the minimum eligibility conditions a statutory mandate, there could be no norm insisted upon in violation of that prescribed. The Apex Council having been entrusted with the duty of providing for the standards of education, the University cannot prescribe any other condition in violation of the essential requirements as prescribed by the Indian Nursing Council. Repelling that contention, this Court held that, admittedly, the Nursing Council has prescribed a 100 bedded hospital as an essential requirement for establishing a graduate course in nursing. The University has not attempted any dilution of such standards and has provided a further rigour in demanding a prior requirement of a 300 bedded hospital. It is trite that only a lowering of standard by the University or the State; of the standard prescribed by the Apex Council, would be W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 26 considered as a violation or derogation of the standards so prescribed. An enhancement of standards, aimed at providing better and quality education, cannot be said to be in derogation or violative of the norms. The said proposition is well settled by the decisions of the Apex Court in **Ambesh Kumar v. Principal,** **L.L.R.M. Medical College, Meerut [(1986) Supp SCC 543]** , **Dr. Preeti Srivastava v. State of M.P. [(1997) 7 SCC 120]** , **State of T.N. v. S.V. Bratheep [(2004) 4 SCC 513]** and **Visveswaraiah Technological University v. Krishnendu Halder [(2011) 4 SCC 606]** . 12. In the instant case, Para.6 of the academic norms dated 17.05.2013 for granting provisional affiliation to colleges and courses and for continuation of provisional affiliation (Ext.P12 in W.P.(C)No.13760 of 2020 and Ext.P9 in W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020) deals with increase of seats. As per Para.6(2) of the academic norms, for increase of seats, at least the first batch has passed out of the applicant college and the college is approved as a professional teaching institution by Government of India, 27 W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 through Gazette notification. As per Para.6(3), for increase of seats, the final year result of the previous batch in applicant college is 60% or above; or above the University average. The learned Standing Counsel for the 2[nd] respondent University would point out that the Governing Council of the University later refixed the pass percentage as 50 or above. 13. The Governing Council of the 2[nd] respondent University, by virtue of its powers under Section 41 of the Kerala University of Heath Sciences Act, 2010, with the approval from the Government of Kerala, has amended Chapter XXI of the Kerala University of Heath Sciences First Statutes, 2013 regarding affiliation of colleges, at its meeting held on 26.08.2019. The amendments were assented to by the Chancellor on 02.12.2019. By Notification No.2035/AC-H/2015/ KUHS dated 24.02.2020, the amendments on affiliation of colleges was published for general information. Statute 5 deals with the procedure to be adopted in granting affiliations. As per Statute 5(ii)(v), in the case of additional courses and/or enhancement of seats, the college shall satisfy the condition that 28 W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 first batch of the courses in the institution under the same stream shall be passed out and the details of the average pass percentage of previous regular examinations of all existing batches of the same course at the time of submitting the application and a declaration that the percentage is not below the minimum prescribed by the Governing Council in the notification issued by the University for the purpose of the addition/enhancement concerned. 14. In the case of Hindustan College of Pharmacy, by Ext.P6 communication dated 09.11.2020 in W.P.(C)No.24914 of 2020, the application made by the petitioner college for enhancement of seats in B.Pharm course from 60 to 100, for the academic year 2020-21, stands rejected stating the following deficiencies; (i) Since the college was started during the year - 2018 19, the first batch of students have not completed their final year and as per the norms enhancement of seats can be permitted only if the first batch is passed out; and (ii) the average pass percentage of previous regular examinations of all existing batches of B.Pharm course in the college is only 24.48 29 W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 while the required pass percentage is 50 or above, as per University norms. In the case of Nirmala College of Health Sciences by Ext.P5 communication dated 11.11.2020 in W.P. (C)No.24922 of 2020, the application made by the petitioner college for enhancement of seats in B.Pharm course from 60 to 100, for the academic year 2020-21, stands rejected stating the following deficiency; The average pass percentage of previous regular examinations of all existing batches of B.Pharm course in the college is only 43.65 while the required pass percentage is 50 or above, as per University norms. 15. In the case of Hindustan College of Pharmacy, B.Pharm course was started in the year 2018-19. B.Pharm course is having a duration of 4 years. The first batch of B.Pharm students are yet to pass out. The average pass percentage of previous regular examinations, i.e., first year and 2[nd] year examinations of B.Pharm course in the college is only 24.48, as against the required pass percentage of 50 or above. In the case of Nirmala College of Health Sciences, B.Pharm course was started in the year 2015-16. Due to COVID-19 Pandemic, final year 30 W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 examinations of the first batch could be conducted only recently and the results are yet to be declared. Therefore, the 2[nd] respondent University took the average pass percentage of previous regular examinations, i.e., first year, second year and third year examinations of B.Pharm course in the college, which is only 43.65, as against the required pass percentage of 50 or above. ## 16. In **K. Velayudhan Memorial Trust v. State of** **Kerala and Others [2010 (3) KHC 23]** the contention raised before a Full Bench of this Court was that in view of the permission granted by Indian Nursing Council (INC) in favour of each of the appellant nursing colleges, the subsequent orders passed by Kerala Nurses & Midwifes Council (KNMC), which are at variance with the permissions granted by INC are illegal and therefore, the learned Judge erred in holding that KNMC should reconsider the issue and obtain appropriate further orders from INC. Therefore, the Full Bench of this Court was dealing with an inter-se dispute between INC and KNMC in the matter of granting approval for nursing courses. In some cases, the intake approved by KNMC was less than the intake approved by INC. In some 31 W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 cases, KNMC even disapproved the commencement of nursing courses. The Full Bench noticed that, the question was earlier considered by a learned Judge of this Court in **National Medical** **Educational Charitable Trust v. Kerala Nursing and Midwifery Council [2006 (2) KLT 612]** in which it was held that, by virtue of the regulation making power contained in subsection (1) of Section 16 of the Indian Nursing Council Act, 1947 the Central Council may prescribe the physical and clinical facilities that may be provided in an institution. The same is only for the purpose of deciding whether the training imparted in that institution, is upto the mark to enjoy the recognition for the qualification awarded pursuant to the training. Recognition or approval of institutions is essentially the function of the State Nursing Council. Clause (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 14 of the Act also recognises the said position. The Full Bench opined that, having regard to the scheme of Indian Nursing Council Act, 1947 and the Kerala Travancore Cochin Nurses and Midwives Act, 1953, the authority of the Indian Nursing Council is limited to the W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 32 establishment of standards of education which includes prescribing the appropriate syllabus, norms of training, prescription of appropriate infrastructure for conducting the courses etc. whereas whether a particular institution which proposes to impart education in Nursing, etc. is to be recognised having regard to the norms and standards prescribed by the National Council and also having regard to the availability of the infrastructure, etc. of a particular institution is a matter to be decided by the State Council established under the Kerala Act of 1953. If that is the legal position emerging from the examination of the two enactments referred to earlier, clauses (2) and (6) of Regulation 78 insofar as they purport to obligate the institutions proposing to impart training in nursing and allied courses to seek prior approval of the National Council are ultra vires the authority of the National Council. That being the case the various communications issued by the National Council, purporting to permit each of the appellants herein to commence various courses in nursing with an intake of students specified as against 33 W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 each of those courses, are without any basis in law. The appropriate authority to consider such applications is the State Council established under State Act of 1953, though there is a statutory appeal against such authority provided under Section 27 of the said Act. No doubt, the State Council while granting or declining permission/approval for commencement of any training course in nursing or allied courses covered under the above mentioned two enactments is bound by the norms and standards stipulated by the National Council. The Full Bench modified the judgment of the learned Single Judge, by directing the State Council to consider afresh the case of each one of the appellants for conducting various courses which are the subject matter of dispute, in the light of the judgment, and in accordance with the norms and standards prescribed by the National Council, apart from any of the prescriptions made by the Kerala State or the State Council and take expeditious decision with reference to each of the appellants, preferably within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of that judgment. Further the W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 34 University of Kerala was also directed to give affiliation to each of the appellants in terms of the decision to be taken by the State Council as indicated, if necessary. 17. In **Mar Gregorious Memorial Muthoot Medical Centre v. Kerala University of Health and Allied Sciences [2011 (4) KHC 333]** , the question that came up for consideration before a learned Judge of this Court in W.P. (C)Nos.24933 of 2011 and 26443 of 2011 was as to whether Kerala University of Health Sciences is supposed to act just as a 'rubber stamp' in the matter of granting affiliation to institutions invoking the power under Section 50 or 53 of the Kerala University of Health Sciences Act, 2010, once approval is granted in respect of the courses and infrastructure by Indian Nursing Council and Kerala Nurses and Midwives Council. Relying on two Full Bench decisions of this Court in **Vikram Sarabhai** **Educational Trust & B.Ed College v. University of Calicut [2008 (2) KHC 647]** and **K. Velayudhan Memorial Trust [2010 (3) KHC 23]** it was contended that the University does W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 35 not have any power or authority to decline affiliation in respect of B.Sc Nursing course or Post Basic B.Sc Nursing course sanctioned by Nursing Council or reduce the intake by stipulating some or other norms of their choice. ## 18. In **Mar Gregorious Memorial Muthoot Medical** **Centre** this Court found considerable force in the submission made by the learned Standing Counsel for the University that the decision rendered by the Full Bench is not an authority to hold that affiliation to be given by the University is only an empty formality or that once sanction is given by the State Council as aforesaid, affiliation to be given by the University is automatic. There is no such declaration of law in the decision rendered by the Full Bench referring to the relevant provisions of the University Act/Statute or as to the relative rights and liberties of the University in relation to the powers and authority of the Indian Nursing Council/Kerala Nurses and Midwives Council. In **Upasana College of Nursing v. Kerala University for Health and Allied Sciences [2010 (4) KHC 224]** it was held that, 36 W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 granting of affiliation by the University is not an automatic exercise once sanction/permission is obtained from Indian Nursing Council/ Kerala Nurses & Midwives Council. Interference was declined and the writ petitions preferred by the concerned institutions were dismissed as devoid of any merit. The matter was taken up in appeal by the aggrieved institutions. After detailed hearing, the Division Bench, vide judgment dated 13.10.2010 in W.A.No.1715 of 2010 and connected cases, held that the process of affiliation was never automatic. The grant of affiliation is not an empty formality by the University. The University which awards the degree certificates can always ensure that students undergo the proper course study in an eligible institution in accordance with the curriculum prescribed by the University. Further, referring to the relevant provisions under the Calicut University Act and the Calicut University First Statutes, 1977, it has been held by a Division Bench of this Court in **University of Calicut v. Amala Institute of Medical Sciences [2009 (2) KHC 71]** that the University is having 37 W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 ample power to inspect the college seeking affiliation and that the institution is bound to furnish any information called for in this regard. It has also been held that, if there is any serious deficiency in the manner of running the college, the University can definitely take action against the college and 'dis-affiliate' it; the power to dis-affiliate being corollary to the power to affiliate and that the University is vested with the power to conduct necessary inspection and to satisfy itself as to the availability of infrastructure and such other aspects. As the primary function of the University is to guarantee quality education, maintaining/ regulating academic standards of the affiliated institutions, it is open for the University to prescribe conditions for recognition of the institutions, which is not in conflict with the norms prescribed by the INC under the Central Act. As such, the contention of the petitioners that the respondent University is bound to 'sign on the dotted lines' for granting affiliation, the petitioners having obtained sanction/approval from the Central/State Council, is wrong and unfounded. 38 W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 19. In **K.V.M. Trust v. Kerala University of Health & Allied Sciences [2011 (4) KHC 948]** [W.A.No.1528 of 2011 arising out of W.P.(C)No.26443 of 2011] the appellant contended, _inter alia_ , that once the Indian Nursing Council and the State Nurses and Midwives Council accorded permission for the intake of 50 students, the respondent University has no authority to restrict the intake to a lesser number. The Division Bench, relying on the decisions in **Amala Institute of Medical** **Sciences [2009 (2) KHC 71]** and **Upasana College of Nursing [2010 (4) KHC 224]** and also the Regulations of the Indian Nursing Council held that the permission accorded by the Indian Nursing Council is basing upon a prima facie satisfaction of the availability of the infrastructure facilities and it is for the State Council to accord its permission as well as the respondent University to conduct inspection and satisfy the availability of the infrastructure facilities for running the course before granting affiliation. Therefore, the Division Bench upheld the finding of the learned Single Judge that granting affiliation is not an empty W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 39 formality. 20. In **Maa Vaishno Devi Mahila Mahavidyalaya v. State of U.P. [2013 (2) SCC 617]** the Apex Court, in the context of the National Council for Teacher Education (Recognition Norms and Procedure) Regulations, 2009 held that, grant of recognition or affiliation to an institute is a condition precedent to running of the courses by the Institute. If either of them is not granted to the institute, it would not be in a position to commence the relevant academic courses. There is a possibility of some conflict between a University Act or Ordinance relating to affiliation with the provisions of the Central Act. In such cases, the matter is squarely answered in the case of **State of Maharashtra v. Sant Dnyaneshwar Shikshan Shastra Mahavidyalaya [(2006) 9 SCC 1]** where the Court stated that after coming into operation of the Central Act, the operation of the University Act would be deemed to have become unenforceable in case of technical colleges. It also observed that provision of the Universities Act regarding affiliation of technical 40 W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 colleges and conditions for grant of continuation of such affiliation by university would remain operative but the conditions that are prescribed by the university for grant and continuation of affiliation must be in conformity with the norms and guidelines prescribed by the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE). Under Section 14 of the National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993 and particularly in terms of Section 14(3)(a), the NCTE is required to grant or refuse recognition to an institute. It has been empowered to impose such conditions as it may consider fit and proper keeping in view the legislative intent and object in mind. In terms of Section 14(6) of the Act, the examining body shall grant affiliation to the institute where recognition has been granted. In other words, granting recognition is the basic requirement for grant of affiliation. It cannot be said that affiliation is insignificant or a mere formality on the part of the examining body. It is the requirement of law that affiliation should be granted by the affiliating body in accordance with the prescribed procedure and upon proper application of mind. 41 W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 Recognition and affiliation are expressions of distinct meaning and consequences. In the case of **Chairman, Bhartia Education** **Society v. State of Himachal Pradesh [(2011) 4 SCC 527]** it was held that the purpose of recognition and affiliation is different. In the context of the Act, affiliation enables and permits an institution to send its students to participate in public examinations conducted by the examining body and secure the qualification in the nature of degrees, diploma and certificates. On the other hand, recognition is the licence to the institution to offer a course or training in teaching education. The Court also emphasised that the affiliating body/examining body does not have any discretion to refuse affiliation with reference to any of the factors which have been considered by the NCTE while granting recognition. The examining body can impose conditions in relation to its own requirements. These aspects are (a) eligibility of students for admission; (b) conduct of examinations; (c) the manner in which the prescribed courses should be completed; and (d) to see that the conditions imposed by the 42 W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 NCTE are complied with. Despite the fact that recognition itself covers the larger precepts of affiliation, still the affiliating body is not to grant affiliation automatically but must exercise its discretion fairly and transparently while ensuring that conditions of the law of the university and the functions of the affiliating body should be complementary to the recognition of NCTE and ought not to be in derogation thereto. 21. As already noticed, as per Statute 10(2) of the Kerala University of Health Sciences First Statutes, 2013 the grant of affiliation shall depend upon the fulfillment by the Management of all the conditions that are specified here or that may be specified later for the satisfactory establishment and maintenance of the proposed institution/courses of studies and on the reports of inspection by the commission or commissions which the University may appoint for the purpose. In **Perpetual Succour** **Charitable Trust** , this Court What is 'specified later'; indicates any specification, for the satisfactory establishment and maintenance of the proposed institution/ courses of studies and it 43 W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 can be based on the reports by a commission or commissions which the University may appoint for the purpose. This takes in an individual inspection of a college or the appointment of a commission to deal with academic matters and prescribe standards; as held above, for better and quality education. Therefore, this Court did not countenance the argument of the learned Senior Counsel that only a statutory amendment would clothe the University with the power to make such a prescription. In the said decision it was held further that, an enhancement of standards by the University, aimed at providing better and quality education, cannot be said to be in derogation or violative of the norms prescribed by the Apex Council. 22. Para.6 of the academic norms dated 17.05.2013 for granting provisional affiliation to colleges and courses and for continuation of provisional affiliation [Ext.P12 in W.P.(C)No. 13760 of 2020 and Ext.P9 in W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020] issued by the 2[nd] respondent University, in exercise of its powers under Statute 10(2) of the Kerala University of Health Sciences First W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 44 Statutes, 2013 prescribed the conditions that have to be fulfilled by an institution in order to seek increase of seats. Later, the Governing Council of the 2[nd] respondent University, by virtue of its powers under Section 41 of the Kerala University of Heath Sciences Act, 2010, with the approval from the Government of Kerala, has amended Chapter XXI of the Kerala University of Heath Sciences First Statutes, 2013, regarding affiliation of colleges, at its meeting held on 26.08.2019. The amendments were assented to by the Chancellor on 02.12.2019, and the University has published the same, vide Notification No.2035/ACH/2015/ KUHS dated 24.02.2020. Since the Pharmacy College in the respective writ petitions, namely, Hindustan College of Pharmacy and Nirmala College of Health Sciences do not satisfy the eligibility conditions prescribed by the 2[nd] respondent University for increase of seats, no interference is warranted in the orders impugned in the respective writ petitions. For the reasons stated hereinbefore, no interference is warranted on the the academic norms prescribed by the 2[nd] respondent University W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 **==> picture [14 x 9] intentionally omitted <==** for increase of seats, which are aimed for the satisfactory ## establishment and maintenance of the institutions/courses of studies In the result, these writ petitions fail and they are accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. Sd/- **ANIL K. NARENDRAN JUDGE** **yd** W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 46 ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18448/2020** ## **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPROVAL ORDER DATED 25/04/2019 ISSUED BY AICTE.** **EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPROVAL ORDER OF THE PHARMACY COUNCIL DATED 10/06/2019. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 08/02/2019 IN WPC NO.17685/2018 ISSUED BY THE HIGH COURT.** **EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 10/12/2014 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT NAMELY THE BACHELOR OF PHARMACY (B.PHARM) COURSE REGULATIONS, 2014.** **EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE APPROVAL ORDER ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 10/04/2020. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE FRESH REQUEST MADE BY THE PETITIONER DATED 03/07/2020 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.** **EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 14/08/2019 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WA NO.1487/2019 DATED 09/07/2019. EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE UNIVERSITY ORDER NO. 14/AC.1-2/2013/KUHAS DATED 17/05/2013. EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE HIGH COURT IN WPC NO.13760/2020 DATED 26/08/2020.** **EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER 13.8.2929 ISSUED BYTHE 2ND RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY** 47 W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 **EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE REJECTION LETTER DATED 9.11.2020 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT** ## **RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:NIL** W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 48 ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 24914/2020** **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1** **TRUE COPY OF THE APPROVAL ORDER OF THE PHARMACY COUNCIL DATED 10.6.2019.** **EXHIBIT P2** **TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 10.12.2014 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.** **EXHIBIT P3** **TRUE COPY OF THE APPROVAL ORDER ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 10.4.2020.** **EXHIBIT P4** **TRUE COPY OF THE FRESH REQUEST MADE BY THE PETITIONER T 3.7.2020 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.** **EXHIBIT P5** **TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 15.9.2020 IN PWC NO. 18448/2020 OF THE HONBLE COURT.** **EXHIBIT P6** **TRUE COPY OF THE REJECTION LETTER DATED 9.11.2020 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT.** **RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:NIL** W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 49 ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13760/2020** ## **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 24.7.2015 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT GRANTING NO OBJECTION CERTIFICATE.** - **EXHIBIT P2 CONSENT OF AFFILIATION DATED 29.1.2016 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY.** **EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPROVAL ORDER DATED 4.4.2018 ISSUED BY THE AICTE.** - **EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 11.1.2018 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY.** - **EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER INSTITUTION DATED 25.1.2018.** - **EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 10.12.2014 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT NAMELY THE BACHELOR OF PHARMACY(B.PHARM) COURSE REGULATIONS, 2014.** - **EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 8.2.2019 IN WP(C) NO.17685/2018 BY THE HIGH COURT.** **EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE APPROVAL ORDER ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 4/5.6.2020. EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE FRESH REQUEST MADE BY THE PETITIONER DATED 24.6.2020. EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WA NO.1487/2019 DATED 9.7.2019.** W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 50 |**EXHIBIT P11**|**TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 2.8.2019**| |---|---| ||**IN SLP NO.17411/2019 OF THE HON'BLE**| ||**SUPREME COURT.**| |**EXHIBIT P12**|**TRUE COPY OF THE UNIVERSITY ORDER**| ||**NO.15/AC.1/2/2013/KUHS DATED 17.5.2013.**| ## **RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:NIL** W.P.(C)No.18448 of 2020, 24914 of 2020 13760 of 2020 &24922 of 2020 51 ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 24922/2020** ## **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** ## **EXHIBIT P1** **TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 10/12/2014, ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT NAMELY THE BACHELOR OF PHARMACY (B. PHARM, COURSE REGULATIONS, 2014.** **EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE SAID APPROVAL ORDER ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT AS 328 EC DECISION DATED 4/5. 6.2020.** **EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE UNIVERSITY ORDER NO. 15/AC.1/2/2013/KUHS DATED 17.5.2013. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 10.10.2020 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.** **EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 11.11.2019 REJECTING THE AFFILIATION FOR ENHANCEMENT OF SEATS.** ## **RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:NIL** ## **TRUE COPY** **P.A. TO JUDGE**